Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

varmisciousknid t1_j7wjd5e wrote

This was a great read. The part about flow state was interesting. One of my hobbies is telling stories for pen and paper RPGs, it's an activity where I can enter flow state and it requires both creativity in order to make up a story as I go, and also more analytical thought so that I can present players with a balanced challenge with respect to rules that are math-heavy

18

Gloomy_Scene126 OP t1_j7y3nyt wrote

Bergmann’s theory would suggest that you enter the flow state while playing pen and paper RPGs because you’re identified with the activity; you therefore act freely while doing it. On the other hand, nonduality says that the flow state is our natural state and we can get to the point of acting freely in everything we do if we move beyond the realm of identification and dissociation, let’s say.

11

varmisciousknid t1_j7y4m9j wrote

The article was talking about there being separate flow states, one for art and one for academia, that's what I was talking about

1

Gloomy_Scene126 OP t1_j7y54cc wrote

The article only mentioned the flow state insofar as it relates to freedom and identity

2

varmisciousknid t1_j7y6565 wrote

Towards the end of "the ground beneath the fence"

1

Gloomy_Scene126 OP t1_j7y96hk wrote

The end of that section is differentiating between Bergmann and Spira’s view of flow state….in other words it’s establishing the difference between the flow state as seen from a dualistic vs a nondualistic perspective. It uses an example to demonstrate how Bergmann’s dualistic flow works….if I’m identified with my my reasoning skills then I will feel free and therefore enter the flow state while reasoning. Not sure where you’re getting the art and academia idea from.

2

varmisciousknid t1_j7z37kr wrote

I suppose I am making a bit of a leap. He says he's identified with reasoning and can enter flow while reasoning. What kind of tasks do people do while reasoning? Academic type tasks, as opposed to doing more artistic tasks which don't involve reasoning such as improvisation

1

Gloomy_Scene126 OP t1_j7zfsr7 wrote

Yes I mean you’re not wrong in saying that one can be identified with academic tasks and dissociated from artistic tasks or vice versa, which ultimately determines the situations in which theyre able to enter into the flow state; but these are just more examples demonstrating how Bergmann’s dualistic flow works. It’s not really being suggested that academic and artistic are specifically two types of flow, because this isn’t central to the point being made by the article.

2

Sohshi t1_j7x61kh wrote

An old friend from Santa Cruz. Good to see Frithjof getting attention. He was a genuinely good person.

18

Gloomy_Scene126 OP t1_j7y31zg wrote

I’m surprised his work on abstracting above all theories of freedom isn’t more spoken about

9

sv77 t1_j7xm2w3 wrote

Isn’t this same as what Jiddu Krishnamurthy have been saying his entire life?

5

[deleted] t1_j7vrg5d wrote

[removed]

3

Gloomy_Scene126 OP t1_j7w01qw wrote

Yes, and it seems like the West is picking up on it more and more

2

testearsmint t1_j7y0ter wrote

What was the original comment?

1

Gloomy_Scene126 OP t1_j7y4805 wrote

The person talked about how they grew up learning about nonduality in India…they said it’s called Advaita and that it underlies Hinduism and Buddhism

3

gorangutan t1_j7z22ks wrote

Robert spirus definition of non duality etc,awareness being the basis of it,is not shared unanonimously btw.Karl Renz would describe it as deep deep sleep which you cant hold onto it.Jim newman says its just "this" that you cant describe.

Spiru usually covers the lower hanging pointers and which appeases the intellectual mind more than saying non dual message is psychic/energetic in nature..

This can also be seen in retreats where many people go into deep states and looks like they passed out.The group power amplifies the message and that happens mode than in solo practice.

But this is philosophy where things like that are ignored or downvoted to hell usually,which is a shame.

I mean it implies duality as soon as you say we are awareness.Then there are two.

He chose a hard to grasp concept..Which was actually posited by old gurus as well.Limitations of language.

It has been said multiple times non dual message is energetic in nature and guru communicates it with silence but the words are for people who are not sensitive enough for that.

People are kind of right non duality has something to do with identification though.Its been posited its with "I" which already doesnt exist so you cant disidentify with it.In practice things/emotions disolve and get disidentified and you feel lighter.

1

Gloomy_Scene126 OP t1_j7zcue5 wrote

What Rupert is saying isn’t incompatible with the other people you mentioned. Calling it “awareness” or “consciousness” isn’t really to describe it….it’s just giving a name to an indescribable thing. It’s like how religious people say (and this is just an example) that God is indescribable….they give a name but it has nothing to do with describability.

Although it is true to say that using language is limited because it objectifies things…so it’s linked to duality. But it’s often the dualistic path that leads to an eventual recognition of nonduality. So language would still help despite its limitation.

2

gorangutan t1_j7zfo6y wrote

Yeah you got a point.

The only pitfall in practice is it takes on the qualities of the word and generates stereotypical people.

"Conciousness" people become empty minded,seperate themselves from anything but pure awareness.Such a common case if you see spiritual people.

God people think of a man in the sky on certain level and play with hierarchies/guilt and punishment more.

I would posit these qualities/meanings come from collective conciousness as soon as you use those words but thats another angle.

It is ok i guess but not the best pointer in the realm of non duality.It is still good that the energetic aspect of non duality starts working though in my experience.But as we practice we let go of conciousness and awareness as well.

2

Gloomy_Scene126 OP t1_j7zi50f wrote

True. Although Jesus didn’t seem to fall into the trap of thinking there is a man in the sky in the way that other “God people” do. One might argue that religious people are not even properly using their own word. But in any case the words don’t matter much. Everyone takes a different path and uses a different word, but there comes a point where we move beyond words altogether.

2

Sohshi t1_j9htg2v wrote

The 4 day week - This is something Frithjof was advocating back in 1981:
https://www.thenationalnews.com/business/money/2022/09/20/why-a-four-day-working-week-is-successful-for-most-companies/

1

Gloomy_Scene126 OP t1_j9hv7px wrote

That’s funny because Bergmann’s theory would suggest that freedom has nothing to do with obstacles or enhanced choice, but rather it only has to do with identification and dissociation. Removing a day from the work week is like removing an obstacle or enhancing one’s choice to do what he pleases during the week. But if I am already identified with a 5 day work week, then I already feel free and do not need an extra day off. I wonder, then, what Bergmann’s rationale would have been for advocating a 4 day work week.

1

Sohshi t1_j9hxbnp wrote

He was thinking long-term. We were reading "Limits to Growth" by the Club of Rome. He forsaw the collapse our culture is just now recognizing, offering practical solutions to resource scarcity and environmental degradation. There was always a practical foundation to being free. I'm sorry to say I didn't realize how prescient he was. btw - UCSC screwed him - promised him a job. He left his tenured position at UM to move to beautiful Santa Cruz. Then they rescinded the offer. Academic politics - ugh.

1

renopriestgod t1_j83lj7p wrote

Honestly? What do you think this contribute to?

  1. Freedom does not exist
  2. You talk about freedom as a feeling. And sure it can have value to talk about illusions
  3. Also to talk about freedom as difference of associate or dissociate with something, is just to high jack the term freedman for something else. It implies freedom is always the feel you do what is true to yourself. Which is easily proven not to be the case.

This entire article rest on Redefinition of words and unstable premises. Do better

−1

Gloomy_Scene126 OP t1_j840m0z wrote

Whenever people say they are free it is a subjective claim. They say it when they finish an exam or when they’re out of a toxic relationship or when they like the way their life is currently structured or better yet, when they’ve found internal peace. If I feel free, then I obviously don’t have to wait for some external objective change in order to be “really free” as you seem to be suggesting. What exactly is this “objective” definition of freedom that you’re referring to?

1